LibRaw: possible license issues

Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Tue Nov 27 14:45:15 UTC 2012


On 11/27/2012 10:08 AM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
>> OK, so there are some proprietary or otherwise encumbered plugins that might not be GPLv3-compatible but might be compatible with GPLv2.
> 
> You again missed the "GPLv2 with exceptions" part.
> 
>>> Plus, this practice of either using LGPLv2+ or GPLv2+ with exceptions for applications is so widespread in GStreamer land (Totem, PiTiVi, Rhythmbox, Transmageddon, etc.) that I was not comfortable with having a situation where the application silently ends up under a different license due to another library.
>> 
>> I don't think that's a problem because the whole purpose of the "or any later version of the GPL, at your choice" is to allow the GPL to be updated.
> 
> You don't think that it is a problem that our downstreams might inadvertently end up violating the GPL by shipping GPLv3 code that links to non-free software? I am not saying they are, but the chances are too high for me to take this lightly.

Again, if they are doing this then they are already violating the GPL
by shipping GPLv2 code that links to non-free software.  The v2 versus
v3 thing is a red herring.

Andrew.


More information about the devel mailing list